RAMSEY UPWOOD AND GREAT RAVELEY INTERNAL DRAINAGE BOARD
At a Meeting of the Ramsey Upwood and Great Raveley Internal Drainage Board held at the Old Nene Golf and Country Club, Ramsey on Thursday the 9th January 2020
PRESENT
A C Roberts Esq (Chairman) J I Edwards Esq A Butler Esq C W Pickard Esq J R Clarke Esq C P Wilkinson Esq
Mr Robert Hill (representing the Clerk to the Board) and Mr Leo Butler (District Officer) were in attendance.
Apologies for absence
Apologies for absence were received from T F Bedford Esq, R Blackhurst Esq and S J Corney Esq.
B.1174 Declarations of Interest
Mr Hill reminded Members of the importance of declaring an interest in any matter included in today’s agenda that involved or was likely to affect any individual on the Board.
B.1175 Confirmation of Minutes
RESOLVED
That the Minutes of the Meeting of the Board held on the 16th May 2019 are recorded correctly and that they be confirmed and signed.
B.1176 Death of Mr G S Halden
The Chairman referred to the death of Mr Stephen Halden on the 4th December 2019 and that he had been a Member of the Board since the 5th January 2006.
Members stood in silence as a mark of respect for Mr Halden.
RESOLVED
That the Board's appreciation of the services rendered by Mr Halden be recorded in the minutes.
B.1177 Water Transfer Licencing
Further to minute B.1081, Mr Hill reported that the relevant licences have been applied for for the MLC and associated Boards and that these were due to be validated before the end of December 2019 and then the EA have 3 further years to determine them. He also advised that it
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
was worth noting that the EA have confirmed that only MLC system to IDB transfers do not require a separate licence.
B.1178 Damage to Bank Close to Point 54
Further to minute B.1137(3), Mr Hill reported that there had been difficulty in properly identifying the owner/occupier of the land concerned and consequently no letter had been sent at this time. He suggested that a map be forwarded to the District Officer to assist in identifying the exact section and then the required letter could be sent.
RESOLVED
That the Clerk liaise with the District Officer to identify the owner/occupier and that a letter be sent requiring them to remove the rubbish from the watercourse and erect a temporary fence to stop animals from causing further damage to the bank.
B.1179 Use of Droves Claimed by the Board
Further to minute B.1143, Mr Hill reported that there had been no further progress with Cambridgeshire County Council concerning the responsibility for the maintenance of the Droves.
The Chairman reported that he had instructed for a replacement ‘horse friendly’ gate to be manufactured and that he would follow this up to get it installed, after which he would monitor the position for the possible installation of other gates within the District.
B.1180 Contravention of Byelaws
Further to minute B.1145, Mr Hill reported that, following the last meeting of the Board, a further letter had been sent concerning the removal of the fence and it was understood that the fence had now been removed. The District Officer confirmed that this was the case.
B.1181 Drain Adjacent to Tesco's at Point 28
Further to minute B.1146, Mr Hill reported that the Middle Level Commissioners’ Mechanical and Electrical Engineer had been on-site to take technical details of the pump and had been able to calculate that the pump was ‘over producing significantly’ from the original specifications approved by the Board. Following this the Middle Level Commissioners’ Solicitor had sent an email, dated 15th November 2019, detailing this to the Chairman and requesting further instructions from the Board.
The Chairman reported that he had spoken with the Solicitor and it had been recommended not to require the pump to be removed/replaced but for the additional flows to be calculated and an invoice raised for Tesco’s to pay the additional commuted amount to deal with the additional water being pumped into the Board’s system and that he had instructed for this course of action to be taken. In response to the Chairman, Mr Hill confirmed that an invoice had not been raised, at this time.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
RESOLVED
That an invoice be raised to Tesco’s for the additional water being pumped into the Board’s system.
B.1182 Cadent Gas
Further to minute B.1148, the Chairman reported that Cadent Gas had reviewed their initial proposal to pipe and fill 100m of District watercourse and now propose to carry out a less expensive scheme to install a 900mm diameter pipe through the brick arch culvert under the road and extend it downstream to just past the gas main, sheet piling along the watercourse adjacent to the property. He reported that the Board’s programmed drain maintenance works on the Catchwater in this area had been postponed this year to allow Cadent Gas to carry out their works and it was currently proposed for them to complete the works by the end of their financial year. Mr Hill reported that the Consulting Engineer had confirmed that Cadent Gas had recently been informed that they would require planning permission for the works and were in the process of making the required application.
B.1183 Unconsented fence – Point 76
Further to minute B.1149, Mr Hill reported that a letter had been sent and the fence was currently being removed from the Byelaw distance. The District Officer reported that the owner was currently in the process of re-aligning the fence line in accordance with the Board’s requirements. The Chairman reported that although not fully completed, he was satisfied that positive action was being taken to fully comply with the Board’s requirements.
Mr Pickard raised concerns that the matter had still not been fully resolved and queried if the Board should be taking further action in relation to this. The Chairman reported that he was satisfied that action was being taken and he did not consider it necessary for the Board to become further involved at this time. RESOLVED
That the matter be reviewed at the next meeting of the Board.
B.1184 Damage to security fencing at New Fen Pumping Station
Further to minute B.1150, the Chairman reported that, following the last meeting of the Board, he had been in contact with Cambridge Water and that they had subsequently been on site to lift, level and re-site the fence and that the works had been completed to the satisfaction of himself and the District Officer.
B.1185 Clerk's Report
Mr Hill advised:-
i) Middle Level Commissioners and Administered Boards Chairs Meeting
That a fourth Chair’s Meeting was held on the 26th November 2019. F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
The meeting commenced with a presentation with slides covering the lottery funded ‘Fens Biosphere’ bid. This UNESCO designation would have no statutory backing but instead aims to draw attention to the unique nature of the area. Good practice sharing would be facilitated and a framework of support for positive action developed. The idea is to frame the application around the Cambridgeshire peat lands and the IDB districts which provide a network of interconnecting watercourses. As this designation would not lead to a set of actions which would be enforced but could have a positive impact on the area the Board were asked (at this stage) to consider giving its approval in principle to the bid.
RESOLVED
That the Board approve in principle
Health and Safety discussions followed and it was agreed that the new arrangement with Cope Safety Management was working well.
The future vision for the MLC and IDBs was discussed and is covered as a separate agenda item.
On member training, after discussion, it was agreed that members would benefit from training on ‘communications and engagement’ as it was felt that Boards generally had challenges in getting messages across to the public.
The only other item covered in any detail was in relation to Board agendas and minutes. It was resolved that the Chairs supported the move to reducing the amount of paper leaving the MLC offices and it was also agreed, for reasons of efficiency, that Chairs be provided with an action points list as soon as practical after the meetings but in advance of issuing draft minutes.
ii) Association of Drainage Authorities
a) Annual Conference
That the 82nd Annual Conference of the Association had been held at the ICE building in Westminster on Wednesday 13th November 2019. The conference was very well attended and the speakers this year were:-
Stuart Roberts - Vice President National Farmers’ Union – an arable and livestock farmer who has also worked for Defra and Flood Standards Agency – who shared his views on the need for more radical and bold thinking on flood risk management and the supply of water for agriculture.
Bryan Curtis – Chair Coastal Group Network – Chartered Engineer and a member of CIWEM and ICE. Bryan is Chairman of the Coastal Group Network. This is a network of Councils, Ports, Government bodies who provide a collective voice for the coast and management of the shoreline.
Robin Price – Interim Managing Director – Water Resources East (WRE) Water Resources East is a partnership from a wide range of industries including water energy, retail, the environment, land management and agriculture who are working in collaboration to manage the number of significant risks to the future supply of water in F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
the East of England. The NFU and ADA (via the David Thomas) have membership on the Board of WRE.
The conference was introduced by Robert Caudwell who asked all present to mark their appreciation of the work being done in the north east of England to respond to and manage the impacts of the floods. He stated his opinion that warnings at previous ADA conferences over the lack of river maintenance had fallen on deaf ears and that the flooding taking place at the time was clear evidence of the need to better balance capital investment with maintenance spending. He then went on to outline ADA’s intention to lobby all parties throughout the general election. This included sharing the 7-point plan detailed below;
1. Long term investment horizons in the face of climate change challenges Flood risk management delivers enduring benefits and authorities involved need to be able to plan ahead financially over multiple years and need to receive a sensible balance of capital and revenue funding, spread across the river catchments, in order to find efficiencies through climate change adaptation and resilience, and attract business investment. 2. Promote co-operation and partnership working to manage the water environment and reduce flood risk Close cooperation between flood risk management authorities, water companies, communities, business and land managers needs the continued strong support of government to deliver adaptive and resilient flood risk maintenance and similar activities more efficiently and affordably. 3. Total catchment management Total catchment management is now the widely accepted approach to managing our water and now is the time to increase and empower local professionals and communities to manage and operate these catchments together. 4. Sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) The next government needs to fully implement Schedule 3 of the Flood & Water Management Act 2010, to ensure future development can keep pace with the challenges of the changing climate, by ensuring that SuDS are maintained over the lifetime of a development. 5. Support local governance in flood and water level management decision making In some parts of England there is an appetite for greater local maintenance delivery on watercourses and flood defence assets than that currently afforded from national investment. This can be achieved via the careful transfer of some main river maintenance to local bodies or the expansion of areas maintained by those local bodies, such as Internal Drainage Boards, where there is local support and transitional funding. 6. Local Government Finances It is vital that Special and Local Levy funding mechanisms for drainage, water level and flood risk management continue to be part of this funding landscape to maintain the democratic link with local communities affected.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
7. Brexit: Ensuring a resilient regulatory framework for the water environment The next government needs to provide clear policy messages about how they wish to make the delivery of environmental improvements to the water environment easier and more effective as we transition from European legislation such as the Water Framework Directive.
Unfortunately, because the conference was held during the pre-election period sometimes known as Purdah, which restricts certain communications during this time, there were no representatives available from the Environment Agency or Defra which significantly restricted the debate on flood risk management, funding and maintenance issues. However, there was considerable support from the floor of the conference for the view that lack of maintenance had significantly contributed to the recent problems with the River Don and the flooding of Fishlake village.
Officers of the Association were re-elected, including Lord De Ramsey as President and Robert Caudwell as Chairman.
Subscriptions to ADA would be increased by 2% for the following year.
b) Annual Conference
That the Annual Conference of the Association of Drainage Authorities will be held in London on Wednesday the 11th November 2020.
RESOLVED
That the Clerk be authorised to obtain a ticket for the Annual Conference of the Association for any Member who wishes to attend.
c) Annual Conference of the River Great Ouse Branch
That the Annual Conference of the River Great Ouse branch of the Association will be held on Tuesday the 3rd March 2020. The format will be as per the 2019 conference with a workshop in the morning and the conference in the afternoon.
d) Further Research on Eels
Further to minute B.996(e), ADA have advised that the valuable research work being carried out by Hull University on eels and eel behaviour in pumped catchments will be continuing for at least another two years. ADA consider that the financial support to the project to date provided by the IDBs has been positive and noted by the regulator (EA), leading to positive engagement on finding practical solutions at pumping station sites. They therefore consider that it would be useful if IDBs could consider whether they would be willing to continue their annual contributions to this research over that period.
Mr Butler queried the cost of this relation to other more urgent operational needs of the Board. The Chairman commented that although initially against the proposals he could see potential long-term benefits for the continuation of the research and considered it beneficial for the Board to continue its contribution.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
RESOLVED
That the Board contribute £100 per year over the next 2 years towards further research on eels.
e) Floodex 2020
That Floodex 2020 will be held at The Peterborough Arena on the 26th and 27th February 2020.
f) Emergency Financial Assistance for Internal Drainage Boards
That whilst in East Anglia we have not had the unprecedented levels of rainfall which have occurred further north and in the west of the county in recent years this by no means equates to there being no risk of it occurring here. ADA have written to DEFRA seeking to formalise a mechanism for IDBs providing support to the EA in a major event to recover costs. An update will be given should there be any substantive movement from DEFRA on this matter as a result of this request.
iii) Tactical Plans for the Fens Agreement
That the Environment Agency have set up a multi-partner group (FRM for the Fens) to steer work on developing strategic plans for managing flood risk in the lower Great Ouse catchment. This work is considered necessary to address the impacts of population growth and climate change, which are particularly relevant in this area. The EA is requesting approval to the approach being taken in principal and follows the letter sent in January 2019. The perceived value of this work is that it pre-apportions the benefits (land and property which would flood if not defended) so that applying for grant should be more straight forward and the amount of grant possible clearer. This should give increased certainty and clarity and resolves the issue of double counting benefits where for example a property is protected from flooding by both EA and IDB assets. Work on developing the strategy could take up to 15 years though and the proposal also therefore includes a mechanism for allowing grant-in- aided works to progress during this time on a hold-the-line basis.
RESOLVED
That the Board approve in principle
iv) Water Resources East (WRE)
That the Middle Level Commissioners’ Chief Executive has been appointed as ADA’s area representative on the Board of WRE. He will act as spokesman for IDBs who have an interest in the future management and provision of water in the East of England. This is particularly important as government consider plans to make the area more resilient and as the impacts of climate change start to bite in an area of rapid housing growth.
v) Vision for the Future of Boards administered by the MLC
That Members will be aware that the Chair’s meetings hosted by the MLC has had an item on the agenda for the last few meetings on future planning of administration and delivery of operations for the Board’s collectively. As part of this process it has been agreed that members thoughts should be sought on what they envisage the collective future can and should look like to ensure the most resilient, delivery focused approach that can be achieved. Members should when developing their vision of water management in the fens in 2030 F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
consider the challenges of maintaining representation, improving financial resilience, reducing duplication of work, the potential for cost savings, advantages and disadvantages of the various options available, the impacts of technology and sharing of resources and knowledge.
The information gathered from individual meetings will be collated and presented to the autumn 2020 Chairs meeting for their consideration.
RESOLVED That the matter be reviewed at the next meeting of the Board.
B.1186 Consulting Engineers’ Report, including planning and consenting matters
a) The Board considered the Report of the Consulting Engineers, viz:-
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
Ramsey, Upwood & Great Raveley I.D.B.
Consulting Engineers Report – December 2019
Pumping Stations Other than the matters reported at previous meetings or described below, only routine maintenance has been carried out.
New Fen Pumping Station The surge chamber continues to subside and move away from the wet well however it seems to be at an acceptable rate for the time being. The emergency repairs to pump 1 completed in November 2017 have so far stood the test of time nonetheless the pump is in a poor condition. Pump 2 appears to be in a good condition and has operated faultlessly over the period.
Green Dyke Pumping Station Whilst the station has operated trouble free over the period there is a concern that the pump fixing bolts may be heavily corroded and so plans have been made to arrange safe entry to the wet well in spring 2020 to assess the situation. The condition of the weed screen is cause for concern as a heavy build-up of weed could collapse the screen at any time.
Replacement of Green Dyke Pumping Station Further to the Board’s instruction at the May 2019 meeting no further action has been taken concerning developing station replacement proposals or applying for Grant-in-Aid.
Pumping Hours Total Hours Dec 18 – Dec 17 - Dec 16 - Dec 15 - Dec 14 - Dec 13 – Dec 19 Dec 18 Dec 17 Dec 16 Dec 15 Dec 14 39 45 213 (5542) 73 93 182 Green Dyke (5626) (5587) (5429) (5356) (5263) New Fen 234 408 146 306 339 671 213 104 55 211 No 1 (1551) (1338) (1231) (1176) (965) 21 304 91 95 No 2 (3609) (3588) (3284) (3193) (3098) 63 152 50 83 105 130 Upwood Common (4119) (4056) (3904) (3854) (3771) (3666)
Pumping Station Asset Appraisals Further to the asset appraisal carried out in 2010 for the EA the Board requested an update for 2020.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
Green Dyke
Station Details
Internal Drainage Board Ramsey, Upwood & Gt. Raveley Commissioned 1954 Refurbished 1977 (electrified and automated) Pumps 1 no. Allen Gwynnes 24″ Vertical Spindle Axial Flow No. 67716 Duty 760 l/s @ 4.4m Total Gauge Head Drive Motor Mather & Platt SC 70kW @ 580 rpm no. 765438 Gearbox Newbrook SPL26 Dual Drive Control Equipment Wippendell Star-Delta Automatic Level Control Milltronics Multiranger Ultrasonic Weedscreen Cleaner Manual Control Building Brick with felt covered concrete flat roof Telemetry None Fencing None
General Comments Green Dyke is one of three pumping stations in the Ramsey, Upwood and Gt. Raveley Internal Drainage Board catchment and drains an area of arable land two kilometres west of Ramsey. The station discharges into the Great Raveley Drain.
The station was constructed in 1954 adjacent to the previous diesel-powered pumping station, which was subsequently demolished. It was initially powered and manually operated by a Ruston 3VCB diesel engine before being refurbished in 1977 when a Mather & Platt electric motor and Newbrook dual drive gearbox were fitted to the existing pump and the diesel engine used as a standby.
The diesel engine was last overhauled in 1972 and while the engine is still operable spare parts are difficult to obtain as it is now obsolete. Guards are missing from the engine and it does not comply with current health and safety standards.
The gearbox has been rotated to allow for connection to an auxiliary source and, therefore, the engine is no longer in use.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
The station discharges via 24″ steel or cast iron pipework and a concrete outlet bay directly into the Great Raveley Drain. The main collapsed in 2012 and had to be banded and surrounded with concrete, it is very likely that this repair will not last.
Weedscreen
The weedscreen consists of 15mm thick section bars at 85mm centres and is heavily corroded with some of the bars being out of alignment. It is likely that the weedscreen will need to be replaced within the next 5 years. The screen is manually raked.
Control House The brick control building is now 65 years old and is almost at the end of its original design life. The building is structurally sound but there are some signs of brickwork spalling and water ingress.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
The existing windows have been bricked up in the past. The wooden double door is in fair condition but will need to be replaced in the next 10 years. The flat roof appears to be in fair condition but there are signs of water ingress. The rainwater goods are cast iron and will require replacing shortly.
Control Equipment/Pumps
The pumping plant was last overhauled in 1986 and will require an inspection and overhaul as soon as entry to the sump can be carried out safely (plans are in place to do this). Allen Gwynnes the original pump manufacturer is no longer trading but obsolete spare parts can be reverse engineered by local companies or by Weir Pumps who bought out the original manufacturer. It is likely that a new pump or a full refurbishment will be required in the next 10 years.
The control panel, installed in 1977 when the station was electrified, is reaching the end of its design life and ideally should be replaced within the next 5 – 10 years. The level control has been updated to ultrasonics replacing the original probes and a Milltronics Multiranger level controller has been installed in the control panel.
Lowland in the District is at a level between 98.00 – 97.75m ODN; the minimum freeboard provided to the lowest land in the winter is in the region of 1.3 metres. The pump’s impeller is at a level of 95.30 metres, which equates to the manufacturer’s specified minimum pumping level. At the current winter pumping operating level the depth of water is quite low causing issues with pump
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
suction hunting. It is not recommended that the stop level be lowered any further as this could lead to problems with cavitation, which in turn would lead to pump damage. While the depth of sump and pump submergence are just about adequate in current conditions, this and other major concerns mean consideration should be given to a replacement for the station and this should be started in 5 years’ time.
The station is not on telemetry.
Fencing/Compound The compound is not fenced and could well be a target for vandals and thieves, particularly as it is adjacent to a public footpath.
Access is via a long track adjacent to arable land. In view of the poor access to this installation at certain times of the year it is recommended that the Board reviews the pumping station access arrangements, which should be suitable for use by heavy mobile cranes and emergency service vehicles at all times.
The provision of hardstanding to enable a tractor to be located near the station to provide an external drive source for the pumps should a power failure occur is being considered by the Board.
The area around the station is overgrown making access to the station difficult. The concrete base for the original station has not been removed and is uneven and could be a health and safety issue. The electrical feed to the station is exposed on the ground and should be buried/protected without delay as it is a target for thieves and vandals.
Inlets/Outlets The original inlet bay remains and is overgrown. It appears to be in poor condition but as the pipework has been removed there should be no issue with flooding.
The sheet steel pile to the wingwalls and inlet bay are heavily corroded particularly at the interface with the water but should still have a further 10 years life. Whilst it has not be possible to inspect the sheet piles around the pump it is very likely they are in a similar condition to the inlet bay which adds weight for consideration of a replacement station.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
The original outlet bay still remains. The current outlet bay, constructed in 1954 using sheet steel piles and concrete, is in good condition and should have a further 20 years’ life.
The flapvalve is constantly submerged, therefore, the condition could not be assessed but being the original is likely to be worn/corroded.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
Pumping Station 20 Year Expenditure Forecast
Pumping Station Green Dyke Internal Drainage Board Ramsey, Upwood and Gt Raveley
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 - 10 Year 11 - 15 Year 16 - 20 Function Category Description 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025 - 2030 2030 - 2035 2035 - 2040
Total Refurbishment/Replacement 850k
Pumping and Control Equipment
Weedscreen Cleaning Equipment
Control Building
Compound and Surroundings
Telemetry
Need
The station is in a very poor condition especially the intake where the sheet piles are badly corroded and it is likely that the piling around the pump is in a similar condition. It is possible the staion will last another 10 years but urgent cosideration should be given to buiding a new station in 5 years time that will meet the needs of the catchment for the next 50-75 years
Note - Costs are based on value of works at 2009 prices. - These are estimated capital replacement figures and do not include routine maintenance costs.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
New Fen
Station Details
Internal Drainage Board Ramsey, Upwood & Gt Raveley Commissioned 1949 Refurbished 1964 & 2005 1 no. 16″ Mirlees Watson and 1 no. Bedford Pumps 400mm Vertical Pumps Spindle Axial Flow DB 40.09.06 no P1176 Duty 425 l/s @ 4.3/5m Total Gauge Head Drive Motor Brooks Crompton Parkinson SC 34kW & 43kW @ 985 rpm Gearbox Newbrook SPL26 Dual Drive Control Equipment Interlec Autotransformer (2005) Automatic Level Control Hydroranger Ultrasonic Weedscreen Cleaner Manual Control Building GRP Cabinet Telemetry Yes Fencing 2.1m High Spray Coated Palisade
General Comments The station is one of three in the Ramsey, Upwood and Gt Raveley Internal Drainage Board and serves to drain arable land to the west of Ramsey. The station discharges to the River Nene (old course). The station was commissioned in 1949 and was originally constructed with a single pump connected to a Ruston and Hornsey diesel engine located in a brick-built pump house. The station was electrified in 1964 when a new concrete sump and surge chamber was constructed and a single electric pump installed to supplement the existing diesel pump. It was clear in early 2017 this surge chamber was subsiding badly.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
The surge chamber was twisting pump No 1 riser pipe and threatening to fracture the pump/pipework. To mitigate this the surge chamber concrete was chipped away relieving the pressure and a makeshift steel plate fitted to stem a major leak should the Nene surcharge. Since 2017 the chamber has listed a further 4mm, an insurance claim was submitted in 2018 to cover the cost of remedial works but was rejected.
The outfall from the new surge chamber was connected into the existing brick arch culvert under the B1040 public highway which discharges into the River Nene.
The picture above is taken from the River Nene and suggests the arch under the B1040 has deformed under the weight of traffic, whilst the end piece (in the batter down to the river) has not suffered in a similar way.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
Whilst it is difficult to predict how the subsidence will affect the station in the years to come, as it seems to be exacerbated by periods of drought and then high rainfall, it could be as little as 5 years before major works/replacement is required.
Weedscreen
The weedscreen consists of galvanised steel 12mm thick bar sections at 50mm centres. It was installed in 2005 and is in very good condition and should last a further 20 years with little expenditure unless damaged by cleansing. The screen is manually cleaned.
Control House The original brick-built building was demolished in 2005 and a new GRP cabinet was installed on a new concrete pad. The cabinet is in fair condition and should have a further 20 years’ life if maintained, however the concrete pad is subsiding slightly.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
Control Equipment/Pumps
Pump No1 is in a poor condition, last overhauled in 1990. In October 2017 the pump shaft seized underneath the head bearing, urgent remedial works were carried out to get the pump back into operation for the 2017/18 winter however it was clear from the detailed inspection that the pump is badly worn (a contributing factor to the seizure). With Pump No2 doing the bulk of the work Pump No1 only runs for around 80hrs a year so it is probably not worth overhauling when the condition of the station overall is considered. Note: the original manufacturer of the pump, Mirlees Watson, no longer trades.
The No2 pump and pipework were installed in 2005 and whilst all visual and audible indications are that it is in a satisfactory condition it will likely need an overhaul in 5-10 years. It is fitted with a dual drive gearbox so that it can be driven from a tractor PTO in the event of electrical failure.
The control panel was manufactured and installed in 2005 and is in a good condition. This type of equipment should have a design life of around 30 years and therefore should have a further life of 15 years.
The station pipework appears to be in reasonable condition and its life is only limited by the life of the station and the concerns over the subsidence.
The station is fitted with an Oriel telemetry system,
Fencing/Compound Access to the site is via a small lay-by adjacent to the main road. The lay-by is constructed of stone and is in reasonable condition. The compound is part grass and part stoned and is in reasonable condition.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
The compound is surrounded by a 1.8m high spray coated steel palisade fence and was installed in 2005 during the last station refurbishment. It is in good condition with vehicle and pedestrian access and should last a further 15 years.
Inlets/Outlets
The wingwalls either side of the concrete inlet sump are constructed using steel sheet piles and are concrete capped. The condition of the piles is fair with some signs of heavy corrosion particularly at the interface but should last a further 20 years. The inlet sump is in good condition and should have a further 30 years’ life. The inlet and surge chamber have a 1.2 metre high- galvanised post and rail handrail, which is in fair condition with a residual life of 15 – 20 years.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
Pumping Station 20 Year Expenditure Forecast
Pumping Station New Fen Internal Drainage Board Ramsey, Upwood and Gt Raveley
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 - 10 Year 11 - 15 Year 16 - 20 Function Category Description 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025 - 2030 2030 - 2035 2035 - 2040
Total Refurbishment/Replacement 1M
Pumping and Control Equipment Inc above
Weedscreen Cleaning Equipment
Control Building
Compound and Surroundings
Telemetry
Need
1M: Early in 2017 it became apparent the surge chamber was subsiding away from the rest of the Station. Movement continues and it is unclear how long the Station can remain operational. The brick arch discharging water into the Middle Level system shows signs of sinking, whilst this seems to be less of a concern than the main station subsidence It is a factor for consideration. Pump No1 is near the end of its design life. In 2017 the pump head bearing siezed and urgent remedial works had to be carried out. At this time it was clear the pump is badly worn and needs a complete overhaul or replacement
Note - Costs are based on value of works at 2009 prices. - These are estimated capital replacement figures and do not include routine maintenance costs.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
Upwood Common
Station Details
Internal Drainage Board Ramsey, Upwood and Great Raveley Commissioned 1966 Refurbished 2014 Pumps 1 no. Allen Gwynnes 22″ Vertical Spindle Axial Flow No.15301Z Duty 570 l/s @ 5.5m Total Gauge Head Drive Motor Electrical Construction Company Squirrel Cage 45kW @ 735 rpm Gearbox Newbrook SPL 26 Dual Drive Control Equipment Star Delta refurbished by Fuller Controls in 1988 Automatic Level Control Milltronics Multiranger Ultrasonic Weedscreen Cleaner Manual Control Building Brick with felt covered flat roof Telemetry None Fencing None
General Comments Upwood Common pumping station is one of three in the Ramsey, Upwood and Great Raveley Internal Drainage Board catchment and serves to drain arable land west of Ramsey. The pumping station discharges into the Great Raveley Drain.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
The station was constructed in 1966 and replaced the adjacent station which was demolished. The station consists of a single 22″ vertical spindle axial flow pump and discharges via a siphonic pipework arrangement directly into the receiving watercourse via a concrete outlet bay.
Weedscreen
The metal weedscreen consists of 12mm thick section bars at 50mm centres. The screen has surface rust but is in generally good condition and should last a further 15 years unless it is damaged by the cleaning process, which is unlikely to happen as the weedscreen is manually cleaned at present.
Control House The brick constructed building is in fair condition with some bricks showing signs of spalling, however, there is no sign of structural damage or cracking and it should therefore last a further 30 years. The roof is constructed using concrete slabs, mineral felt covered and is in a good condition as are the fascias. The building has no windows and is lit artificially by a single fluorescent light. The old timber door has been replaced and will last another 30 years.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
Control Equipment/Pumps
The pump and motor were overhauled in 2014 and all visual and audible indications are the plant is in a good condition and should remain so for another 10-15 years. The pump does suffer from poor flow presentation from time to time and would benefit from the sump being cleared and jetted out. The original manufacturer, Allen Gwynnes, is no longer trading but Weir Pumps, who took over the company, can provide spare parts or alternatively reverse engineering could be carried out to fabricate unobtainable parts.
The sump and pump submergence appear to be of adequate depth to serve the District for a further 15 – 20 years subject to the peat erosion rates.
The control panel was refurbished in 1994 and is in reasonable condition for its age, the control of the pump has been upgraded with an ultrasonic level system. However, the control enclosure is now over 50 years old and is nearing the end of its design life. Some of the components, including those fitted in 1994, are no longer available but could be replaced by modern equivalents; however, if there was a major failure it would be easy enough to fit a complete new back panel inside the existing enclosure.
The station does not have a telemetry system fitted.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
Fencing/Compound The station is located adjacent to the Great Raveley drain and vehicle access is either along the bank side or farm track. Both of which are unmade which would make a major overhaul or access by emergency service vehicles difficult.
The station is unfenced and could be subject to vandalism. Pedestrian access to the station is by means of concrete slab steps with an adjacent timber handrail, which are both in a fair condition.
Inlets/Outlets The inlet wingwalls are constructed of sheet steel piles and backed with concrete. The piles are in relatively good condition with minimal corrosion and should have a further 30 years’ life. The inlet constructed of concrete appears to be in good condition. The inlet and wingwalls have a 1.2 metre high galvanised handrail, which is in good condition and should have a residual life of 20 more years.
The outlet bay is constructed in concrete and is in good condition, the flapvalve is in a fair condition but is likely to require an overhaul in 5-10 years.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
Pumping Station 20 Year Expenditure Forecast
Pumping Station Upwood Common Internal Drainage Board Ramsey, Upwood and Gt Raveley
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 - 10 Year 11 - 15 Year 16 - 20 Function Category Description 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025 - 2030 2030 - 2035 2035 - 2040
Total Refurbishment/Replacement 700k
Pumping and Control Equipment 5k Inc
Weedscreen Cleaning Equipment
Control Building 5k
Compound and Surroundings
Telemetry
Need
Pump and motor overhauled summer 2014.
The pumping station will require a major refurbishment/replacement in 20 years' time. The cost of which is likely to be £700k.
Note - Costs are based on value of works at 2009 prices. - These are estimated capital replacement figures and do not include routine maintenance costs.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
Pumping Station Valuations-RUGR I.D.B
The following is an estimate of the maximum expected cost of rebuilding or replacing the pumping station on the same or an adjacent site following a catastrophic failure, eg a fire, a collapse or an explosion.
Site Name RUGR I.D.B-Green Dyke Pumping Stn.
Site Data
No. Pumps 1 Station Capacity 760 l/s @ 4.4m Total Gauge Head Station built 1954 (electrified and automated 1977)
Description of Station Allen Gwynnes 24″ Vertical Spindle Axial Flow, Mather & Platt SC motor 70kW @ 580 rpm Newbrook SPL26 Dual Drive Wippendell Star-Delta control. Brick pumphouse with concrete roof
Valuation
Civils Works £413,010.00 M&E £152,740.00 Other £43,000.00 Total £608,750.00
Breakdown of valuation
Civils Works
Pump sump/pipework £317,700.00 Hard standing Fencing Outfall £31,770.00 Pumphouse/Control building £52,950.00 Other weedscreen £10,590.00
M&E
Pump £76,370.00 Control Equipment/cabling £21,820.00 Power Supply inc in public liability Motor/gearbox £21,820.00 Installation £32,730.00
Other
Approvals £10,750.00 Liaison and consultation £5,375.00 Design £16,125.00 Supervision £10,750.00
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
Pumping Station Valuations-RUGR I.D.B
The following is an estimate of the maximum expected cost of rebuilding or replacing the pumping station on the same or an adjacent site following a catastrophic failure, eg a fire, a collapse or an explosion.
Site Name RUGR I.D.B-New Fen Pumping Stn.
Site Data
No. Pumps 2 Station Capacity 0.85 cumecs Station built 1964 & 2005
Description of Station 16″ Mirlees Watson and Bedford Pumps 400mm Vertical Spindle Axial Flow Brooks Crompton Parkinson SC 34kW & 43kW @ 985 rpm. GRP Control Building
Valuation
Civils Works £518,910.00 M&E £234,565.00 Other £43,000.00 Total £796,475.00
Breakdown of valuation
Civils Works
Pump sump/pipework £370,650.00 Hard standing £10,590.00 Fencing £10,590.00 Outfall/discharge arch £52,950.00 Control building £21,180.00 Other, weedscreen/surge chamber £52,950.00
M&E
Pumps £130,920.00 Control Equipment/cabling £43,640.00 Power Supply Public liability Motors/gearbox £27,275.00 Installation £32,730.00
Other
Approvals £10,750.00 Liaison and consultation £5,375.00 Design £16,125.00 Supervision £10,750.00
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
Pumping Station Valuations-RUGR I.D.B
The following is an estimate of the maximum expected cost of rebuilding or replacing the pumping station on the same or an adjacent site following a catastrophic failure, eg a fire, a collapse or an explosion.
Site Name RUGR I.D.B-Upwood Common Pumping Stn.
Site Data
No. Pumps 1 Station Capacity 570 l/s @ 5.5m Total Gauge Head Station built 1966 Allen Gwynnes 22″ Vertical Spindle Axial Flow No.15301Z. ECC SC motor Description of Station 45kW @ 735 rpm.Star Delta refurbished 2014.Newbrook SPL 26 Dual Drive Brick control building with mineral covered flat roof
Valuation
Civils Works £328,290.00 M&E £114,555.00 Other £43,000.00 Total £485,845.00
Breakdown of valuation
Civils Works
Pump sump/pipework £264,750.00 Hard standing Fencing Outfall £31,770.00 Control building £21,180.00 Other £10,590.00
M&E
Pump £54,550.00 Control Equipment/cabling £21,820.00 Power Supply inc in public liability Motor/gearbox £21,820.00 Installation £16,365.00
Other
Approvals £10,750.00 Liaison and consultation £5,375.00 Design £16,125.00 Supervision £10,750.00
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
Flood Risk Management (FRM) for the Fens Technical Group [previously reported as the Future Fenland Project] The Middle Level Commissioners’ Planning Engineer has represented both the Middle Level Commissioners and their associated Boards on the Technical Group since the last Board meeting.
An article detailing the project was included on page 16 of the Summer edition of the ADA Gazette. This can be found at https://flickread.com/edition/html/index.php?pdf=5d1efbbc0a48b#16
The project is further discussed under a separate Agenda item.
Planning Applications In addition to matters concerning previous applications, the following 4 new development related matters have been received and, where appropriate, dealt with since the last meeting: MLC Council Ref. Type of Ref. Applicant Development Location MJS Construction Mixed Use 359 H/19/00896/REM (March) Ltd Development St Marys Road, Ramsey* Residential Ugg Mere Court Road, Ramsey 360 H/19/01190/PMBPA Mr S Halden (2 plots) Heights 361 H/19/01349/CLPD Mrs A Leaver Smallholding Middle Drove, Ramsey Heights Leisure 362 H/19/01847/FUL Mr & Mrs Wall (Equestrian) Middle Drove, Ramsey Heights Planning applications ending ‘RM’, ‘REM’ or ‘RMM’ relate to reserved matters Planning applications ending ‘PMBPA’ relate to Prior Approval - Agricultural to Dwellings Planning applications ending 'CLPD' relate to the Certificate of Lawfulness proposed
Developments that are known to propose direct discharge to the Board’s system are indicated with an asterisk. The remainder are understood to propose surface water disposal to soakaways/infiltration systems or sustainable drainage systems, where applicable. The applicants have been notified of the Board's requirements.
Erection of a food-store, petrol filling station, residential development, community facilities and associated highways and infrastructure works – Tesco Stores Ltd & Abbey Properties Cambridge Ltd (MLC Ref Nos 114, 133 & 168); Application to replace Planning Permission 0501658OUT for erection of foodstore, petrol filling station, residential development, community facilities and associated highways and infrastructure works at land at the corner of Stocking Fen Road and Ramsey St Marys Road, Ramsey - Lord De Ramsey’s 1963 Settlement (MLC Ref No 244) and Reserved matters application for the residential phase consisting of 108 flats and houses, means of access (to eastern side of high lode), appearance, landscaping, layout and scale. Application made pursuant to outline permission 0501658OUT varied by permission 0900365S73 land at The Corner of Stocking Fen Road and St Marys Road, Ramsey - Abbey Properties (Cambs) Ltd & Lord de Ramsey (MLC Ref No 248) F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
(a) Tesco Stores Ltd site The discharge from the Tesco Stores Ltd balancing pond will be dealt with elsewhere on the Agenda.
(b) Residential development A meeting, attended by the Commissioners’ Chief Executive and Planning Engineer, with the applicants’ engineering consultant, MTC Engineering (Cambridge) Ltd [MTC], was held at the beginning of October to discuss flood risk and surface water disposal measures and points of discharge.
No subsequent discussion or submissions have been received.
Mixed use development comprising employment (including trade counter sales) (use classes, B1, B2 and B8) car sales, car breaking, combined heat and power uses and a children's day nursery (D1), means of access and road layout at land opposite Viscount Garage, St Marys Road, Ramsey – Client of ESP Ltd (MLC Ref No 210); Abbey Properties (Cambs) Ltd (MLC Ref Nos 225, 278 & 300); Client of Cannon Consulting Engineers (MLC Ref No 354), Greystoke Land (MLC Ref No 357) & MJS Construction (March) Ltd (MLC Ref No 359)
Further to the last meeting report a Reserved Matters planning application was submitted to the District Council at the end of April by the Pegasus Group on behalf of MJS Construction (March) Ltd.
The Drainage Strategy provided by Cannon Consulting Engineers advises that:
“Surface water management
Surface water runoff from the approved development will be discharged to the Foot Drove boundary ditch via two outfalls (simulation results for each network are appended). Rates will be restricted to 1.1 l/s/ha. The impermeable catchment for each network is shown on the appended drawing 306. Urban creep (10 % of the paved area).
Sufficient surface water attenuation will be provided to manage the 1 in 100 annual probability storm inclusive of 40 % climate change. Several attenuation facilities are proposed (shown on drawing 303) with each being formed of two to three layers of subbase replacement crates (Permavoid or similar approved). A single flow control is proposed for each of the two networks to allow for a simpler network (and thus reduced maintenance requirements). A simulation of each network is appended.
Runoff will be treated upstream of the attenuation by permeable paving and roadside filter drains. Drawing 304 shows the location of the features and drawing 305 provides typical sections.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
Maintenance of the surface water management will be undertaken by a private management company (details of which will be determined at the appropriate later stages). A management activity plan (drawing 307) is appended.”
Having not been involved in the design it is difficult to be definitive but unless significant works are undertaken it is likely that there will be inadequate fall for the site to discharge by gravity and damage may occur to the crates if HCVs are allowed to track over them due to the lack of “cover”.
The Board will note from the following drawing, Cannon Consulting Engineers’ Drawing No Y641 - PL - SK - 303 Rev –, that two outfalls into the Board’s system are currently proposed. Other local Boards try to minimise the number of outfalls entering their systems and it is left to the Board’s discretion whether it wishes to make such a request.
Planning permission was subsequently approved in September subject to the imposition of conditions of which only one is of interest to the Board and this refers to ecological and biodiversity issues.
The Officer’s Report includes the following:
“Flood Risk:
As set out in the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (Section 38(6)) and the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (Section 70(2)) in dealing with planning applications the Local Planning Authority shall have regard to the provisions of the development plan, so far as material to the application, and to any other material considerations. This is reiterated within relevant paragraphs in the NPPF. The development plan is defined in Section 28(3)(b) of the 2004 Act as “the development plan documents (taken as a whole) that have been adopted or approved in that area”. The development plan documents and relevant policies (to this proposal) are outlined in the ‘National Guidance/Policy section above.
The site is deemed to be in the countryside and within Flood Zone 3a of the Huntingdonshire’s SFRA 2017. It is an established principle that new development should be steered to areas of land at the lowest risk of flooding and to develop in areas at risk of flooding only where necessary and provided that any such necessary development can be made save over its lifetime.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
Extract from Cannon Consulting Engineers’ Drawing No Y641 - PL - SK - 303 Rev. –
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
The application proposes a mixed development of B1 (offices and innovation centre, B2 (industrial), B8 (storage with ancillary trade sales), and sui generis* car sales, in flood zone 3a and is therefore contrary to policy LP5 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan to 2036. This policy aims to ensure that the users and residents of development are not put at unnecessary risk in relation to flooding, and the policy aims to steer such developments away from areas at this of flooding in the first instance. The proposal is therefore a departure from the development plan and has been advertised as such.
In terms of other material planning considerations under this heading, the application site benefits from an extant planning permission for a mixed use development (employment use) and is therefore a fallback position of considerable weight. In flood risk terms the mixture of employment uses of the land (proposed under this application) are no more vulnerable to flood risk than the approved, predominantly B use Class employment land uses. The Planning Practice Guidance designates buildings used for offices, general industry, storage and distribution (amongst other uses) all as “less vulnerable” to flood risk.
Moreover, a similar footprint of development is proposed (compared to the previous outline consent) and the Applicant submitted a Sequential Test for Flood Risk for the proposed development. The Sequential Test and subsequent Exception Test concludes that the application of the sequential test has demonstrated that there are no other sites available within Ramsey assessment area which would be suitable for the development in terms of accessibility and that have a lower risk of flooding.
The Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) has reviewed the documents and have not objected to the principle of development.
In summary, having regard to the development plan position, as well as other material planning considerations, it is concluded that the proposed development is acceptable from a flood risk perspective for the reasons outlined above, and subject to conditions.”
and
“CCC Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) – has reviewed the following documents and based on these has removed the objection to the reserved matters application. It has been demonstrated that the site can be drained through the use of sub-base attenuation crates beneath permeable paving. A flow control will be used to restrict discharge rate to 1.1l/s/ha before discharging into the Foot Drove Drain which is managed by the Middle Level Commissioners Internal Drainage Board (IDB).”
It is reassuring to note that the Case Officer recommended the inclusion of an informative referring to the need to seek the Board’s consent but this does not appear to have been acted upon and is not included on the Decision Notice.
*Sui generis and planning permission. Sui generis is Latin for 'of its own kind'. It is a term used to categorise buildings that do not fall within any particular use class for the purposes of planning permission. The different use classes are set out in the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
Both the applicant and agent have been advised of the Board’s requirements but, to date, no correspondence has been received from the applicants or the applicants’ agent concerning this development. This is disappointing given the involvement of these parties in sites in neighbouring Boards. No further action has been taken in respect of the Board’s interests.
Further involvement will be required if development of the proposal is progressed and, based on the current information, the Board’s consent will be required.
Residential re-development the former Ramsey North Railway Station to the south west of St Marys Road, Ramsey – (Ramsey SPA Site RA2 Ramsey Gateway) - Client of Maple Solicitors (MLC Ref No 276); Seagate Homes Ltd (MLC Ref No 284) & Seagate Homes (UK) Ltd (MLC Ref No 308)
No further correspondence has been received from the applicant or the applicant’s agents concerning this development and no further action has been taken in respect of the Board’s interests.
Huntingdonshire District Council (HDC) Local Plan to 2036 Infrastructure Planning and Delivery In May the following was received from the District Council:
“I am writing with regards your continued input into the infrastructure needs for Huntingdonshire.
Thank you for your agency/company engagement over the last 18 month in the development of the Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP). This was used to support the new Local Plan to 2036 which was considered for adoption by Full Council on 15th May. Please visit the following link and specifically documents INF/01 – 03 to view the final documents again http://www.huntingdonshire.gov.uk/planning/new-local-plan-to-2036/local-plan-document- library/ “
Developer Contributions Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) and Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Huntingdonshire District Council is currently reviewing the 2011 Developer Contributions Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) and Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). To inform the development of the SPD it needs to better understand current and future infrastructure requirements, what would trigger a developer contribution and how any Section 106 money that has previously been received has been spent. Also, what infrastructure has been delivered as a result thus enabling the District Council to test a revised Developer Contributions and CIL schedule against development viability and hence provide practical up-to-date guidance together with a schedule for land owners, developers and development management officers.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
A Public Consultation (using a questionnaire format) was held between Tuesday 16 July and Friday 6 September but it was not considered appropriate to respond, primarily because the Commissioners and associated Boards do not currently have any infrastructure projects which are likely to require developer contributions through the planning process. However, the opportunity was taken to advise the District Council of the current and potential future funding processes in respect of our interests ie Grant-In-Aid funding, Green Infrastructure, Navigation and Partnership Working.
The response included the following summary:
“As discussed above, there are procedures in place for external funding which are available to the Commissioners and associated Boards and, therefore, they do not currently have any projects for the delivery of infrastructure that require developer contributions through the planning process. It is likely that this will remain the case in the short to medium term.
However, as the findings of the above projects and studies are completed and assessed, together with impacts as a result of changes to Government policy, seeking funding via the planning process may become necessary in the longer term. However, the extent, location and value of this is currently unknown and may take some time to determine.”
Cambridgeshire Flood Risk Management Partnership (CFRMP) The Middle Level Commissioners’ Planning Engineer has represented both the Middle Level Commissioners and their associated Boards since the last Board meeting. The main matters that may be of interest to the Board are as follows:
Future Meetings Following the successful “joint” approach future meetings will involve both the Cambridgeshire Flood Risk Management Partnership (CFRMP) and Peterborough Flood & Water Management Partnership (PFLoW). The MLC are stakeholders in both partnerships.
Draft National Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management (FCERM) Strategy for England A public consultation on the draft FCERM Strategy for England document was held between May and June.
Members of the partnership generally considered that amongst other matters the consultation could have been more ambitious; sought greater RMA involvement; and that surface water flooding should have been included.
Following the consideration of the responses it is intended to publish the final national FCERM strategy for England in 2020.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
Local FRM Strategy Both the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Strategies are due to be reviewed soon and may be a joint Cambridgeshire and Peterborough response.
The Environment Agency’s Joint Assurance Group This group provides support to the RMAs on the delivery of Grant-in-Aid (GiA) funded projects and meets on a monthly basis to discuss business cases.
Partnership members generally agreed that it would be beneficial to understand what the EA, in its role as the approval body, would like to see in business cases and requested suitable good examples that could be used as guidance.
The EA advised that:
(i) The lack of sharing of suitable business case examples may be for GDPR/commercially sensitive/economic reasons and advised that whilst the EA cannot ‘circulate’ these, other RMAs can. (ii) Due to the specialist nature of projects within The Fens it may not be possible to find enough suitable projects.
Property Flood Resilience Pathfinder Project A £700k grant bid was made by a consortium of LLFAs. Confirmation of a successful bid is awaited.
Further details on the project can be found in Flood Resilience Community Pathfinder Evaluation Final Evaluation Report October 2015.
Further details can be found at the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/29-million-extra-funding-to-boost-action-on-making-homes-more- resilient-to-floods
Riparian Responsibilities In order to raise awareness of and instigate discussion on an issue that causes difficulties for RMAs, including the Boards, primarily due to increased workload and costs, the County Council’s Flood Risk and Biodiversity Team prepared an “Issues and Options Briefing Note” seeking changes to current practices that are inefficient and create inconsistency across the county in the use of public resources to address the issues associated with riparian assets. The document is currently being considered by the Regional Flood and Coastal Committee.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
Cambs County Council Capitally Funded Highway Drainage Schemes Schemes have been assessed and prioritised based upon level of flooding reported, ie high priority is property flooding or risk to life, low priority is highway only flooding and will be developed to provide estimated costs and prioritised to be delivered to available budget. There is an annual highway drainage budget of £1m, which needs to cover all staff, investigation, design and construction costs and, therefore, not all the schemes will be delivered in the current financial year.
The majority of investigation and design is delivered through Skanska or its supply chain, and managed by the County’s Highways Projects team. Priority and funding are confirmed by its Asset Management team.
There are currently 22 schemes ongoing within the County, six of which are within the Fenland district, but none are within the Board’s area.
District Council Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) & Water Cycle Study (WCS) documents Most of the SFRA and WCS documents are considered old and have not been updated as initially intended. All will require reviewing as supporting evidence when the respective District Council’s Local Plans are updated.
A ‘joint’ County-wide document was suggested but was not considered possible due to the differing states of the various Local Plans across the County.
No reference was made to the funding arrangements for the provision of the updated documents.
Good Governance for Internal Drainage Board Members In March and April 2019 ADA ran a series of five Good Governance Workshops for IDB Members. The recordings from these events will be available as a series of training modules via the ADA website later in 2019.
A copy of the slides used at the presentation can be found at the following link: https://www.ada.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Good_Governance_Workshop_Slides_2019.pdf
Public Sector Co-operation Agreements (PSCA) Following a problem encountered within North Level District IDB which required close liaison with Peterborough City Council, in its role as the Highway Authority, the possibility of arranging PSCAs with IDBs and Councils was raised but has not yet been concluded.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
Updates on Highways England (HE) Scheme The former areas 6 and 8 now form the East Region and the new term contractor is Ringway. The previous short-term Asset Support Contracts (ASC) have been replaced by a 15-year Road Investment Strategy (RIS) contract in order to ensure a consistent long-term approach.
Anglian Water Services Limited (AWSL) Price Review 2019 (PR19) OFWAT like what is being proposed but not the associated costs. AWSL contends that it is trying to be “proactive and not reactive”. Note: In order to reduce charges on its customers AWSL currently appears reluctant to incur any unnecessary additional costs beyond what it is obliged to accept.
Requests have been made for suitable applications to be submitted to its project funding programme. It is hoped that a meeting with AWSL’s Flood Partnership Manager will be arranged soon.
General Advice Assistance has been given, on the Board’s behalf, in respect of the following:
a) In September 2017 the Board consented an application from Cadent Gas Ltd to pipe and fill 100 metres of district watercourse downstream and including the road culvert at Ugg Mere Court Corner. The purpose of the work is to protect the high pressure gas main that crosses the district watercourse on the outside of a road bend and prevent damage to the gas main in the event of a road traffic accident on the corner (Ugg Mere Court Corner has suffered a number of accidents in the past). After a review of the consented scheme by Cadent Gas Ltd further less costly schemes have been considered and an alternative scheme was submitted. This scheme is to install a 900mm diameter pipe through the brick arched culvert under the road and extend it downstream just past the gas main. Steel sheet piles will be driven along the boundary between the adjacent property and the watercourse on the left hand side looking downstream. Cadent Gas Ltd is progressing this scheme with the intention to starting work in February/March 2020.
Consulting Engineer
16 December 2019
RUGtR(328)\Reports\December 19
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
Upwood Common Pumping Station
The Chairman reported that the motor had failed pre-Christmas and had been removed for repair and the pump operated by tractor power-take-off (pto) over the Christmas period. The fault was found to relate to the electrical connections and the District Officer reported that the connections in the junction box had been modified to enable any future problems to be spotted earlier. He further reported that the motor had now been returned to service and the pump was fully operational again. The Chairman reported that during this time the pump had been attended to by Mr A Butler and the District Officer, whose tractor was also used and, on behalf of the Board, he thanked them both for their time and use of their plant and equipment and reminded them to submit an invoice for the use of the tractor.
Mr Hill reported that the Consulting Engineers had estimated that the cost of the repairs would be in the region of £2,000.
New Fen Pumping Station
The Chairman reported on the current position regarding the subsidence at the station, as detailed in the Consulting Engineer’s report, and raised concerns over the condition of the brick arch culvert which discharges into the River Nene. Councillor Clarke queried the option of inserting plastic pipe(s) through the arch, as had been considered at the last meeting of the Board, and stated his opinion that taking action concerning the arch should be a priority for the Board. The District Officer considered that the Board should be looking to draw up an emergency contingency plan to be ready should any major fault develop at this station.
Green Dyke Pumping Station
Mr Butler raised the potential problems that could be caused by the failure of the discharge flap valve and asked if it would be viable to consider alternative discharge arrangements from the pumping station. In response to the Chairman, Mr Hill updated the meeting on the current position regarding the availability of grant-in-aid and of the Board’s decision concerning applications made at the last meeting of the Board. The Chairman referred to the crane-hoist at the station and although it was fully operational, it needed to be inspected and certified for use before the Board could use it.
Mr Butler reported that the Consulting Engineers intended to inspect the pump fixing bolts during Spring 2020 and wondered if it would be possible to carry out an inspection of the flap valve at the same time.
RESOLVED
i) That the Report and the actions referred to therein be approved.
ii) New Fen Pumping Station
That the Consulting Engineers be requested to draw up proposals to address the subsidence at the pumping station and possible collapse of the brick arch discharge culvert and to present these proposals at the next meeting of the Board.
iii) Green Dyke Pumping Station
a) That the Clerk keep the Board updated on the position regarding the availability of grant-in-aid and, when the position becomes clear for grant-in-aid to be available, the F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
Consulting Engineers to progress a scheme for the replacement of Green Dyke pumping station.
b) For the crane/hoist to be added to the insurance list for inspection and certification.
c) For the Consulting Engineers to assess the condition of the discharge flap valve when inspecting the pump fixing bolts.
iv) Pumping Station Insurance Valuations
That the Consulting Engineers instructions be used for the insurance values for the Board’s pumping stations from the 1st April 2020.
Green Dyke pumping station - £620,000 New Fen pumping station - £800,000 Upwood Common pumping station - £500,000
b) Development at Ramsey Business Park, St Mary’s Road, Ramsey (MLC Ref Nos. MLC 225, 278, 354, 357 & 359)
Mr Hill reported that the Middle Level Commissioners’ Planning Engineer had produced a Supplementary Report concerning this application in which he made the following comments:
Extracts from the Geo Environmental Assessment showing the ground conditions – a layer of topsoil over a thick layer of sand and gravel overlying stiff Oxford Clay. As a result the site features a high ground water table which according to the tests undertaken last April ranges from 1.40 – 0.80m below the ground surface. These have been transposed onto Drg. No. 49692/G/FIG02.
Members will be aware that this site has been the subject of planning permission for several years. Care should be taken when viewing the masterplan as this may be “illustrative”.
It is not known whether the site will be developed as a whole or as individual plots. Experience with other sites in similar locations can take many years to complete. The proposed means of attenuation is via plastic storage crates. Problems with using them at this location include the high ground water table; the lack of gradient to the Board’s system and, therefore, may require pumped discharges; the depth of cover required if the crates are trafficked by HGVs, forklifts etc; long term maintenance including silt removal and replacement.
It is understood Board members have concerns about the adverse implications that this development may have on the Board’s system and operations.
and tabled Drg. No. AP0001 revision PO6 from DT Architects concerning the proposed development.
Members discussed the proposals and the potential impact on the Board. Concerns were raised over the proposals to utilise storage crates to attenuate surface water and they did not consider that it would be possible to properly discharge by gravity from the site using this method. The Chairman did not consider there was enough detail at this point for the Board to make any firm decisions concerning this application but, to guide the Planning Engineer in his responses to the applicant, it was agreed that:-.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
a) The Board required the full 9m Byelaw distance to be retained.
b) The Board would require access points to be made available for maintenance works to the Board’s drain.
c) Arrangements for the disposal of spoil from the Board’s drain would need to be agreed.
d) The Board would require an attenuated discharge from the site and for the applicant to prove, to the satisfaction of the Board’s Consulting Engineers, that any proposed method would work.
e) The number of outfalls could only be considered after a suitable method of attenuation had been agreed.
f) No trees or overhanging vegetation were to be allowed with the 9m Byelaw distance.
g) Other matters that may affect the Board shall be discussed when the above matters have been addressed.
B.1187 District Officer’s Report
The District Officer reported that the main items he would wish to comment on had already been discussed earlier in the meeting. He confirmed that the drain maintenance programme had been completed, apart from the Catchwater section which had been put back due to the Cadent Gas works being progressed.
RESOLVED
That the Report and the actions referred to therein be approved and that the Officer be thanked for his services.
B.1188 Conservation Officer’s Newsletter
Mr Hill referred to the Conservation Officer’s Newsletter, dated December 2019, which had previously been circulated to Members.
B.1189 Claims for Highland Water Contributions – Section 57 Land Drainage Act 1991
Mr Hill reported that the sum of £6,037.47 (inclusive of supervision) had been received from the Environment Agency (£8,140.42 representing 80% of the Board's estimated expenditure for the financial year 2019/2020 less £2,102.95 overpaid in respect of the financial year 2018/2019).
B.1190 Association of Drainage Authorities Subscriptions
Mr Hill reported that it was proposed by ADA to increase subscriptions by approximately 2% in 2020, viz:- from £553 to £565. F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
RESOLVED
That the increased subscription be paid for 2020.
B.1191 Contravention of Byelaws – Grasmere, Chapel Road, Ramsey Heights
The Chairman reported that the proposed works to this section of the Catchwater had been put back to assist with the Cadent Gas works, but there were access issues which the Middle Level Commissioners’ Solicitor was dealing with. He informed Members that currently the Solicitor was dealing with Mr Lancaster through the Citizen Advice Bureau to try to resolve matters.
The District Officer reported that a site meeting had been arranged for Tuesday the 14th January 2020 with himself, the Middle Level Commissioners’ Solicitor and Mr Lancaster to attempt to resolve matters ahead of the maintenance works programmed for September/October 2020.
B.1192 Installation of Electric Cable – Harpers Drove, Ramsey Heights
Mr Hill reported that the Board had consented to the installation of a new electricity cable at Harpers Drove and completed a Wayleave Agreement with UK Power Networks.
B.1193 Determination of annual values for rating purposes
The Board considered the recommendations for the determination of annual values for rating purposes.
RESOLVED
i) That the determinations recommended be adopted by the Board.
ii) That the Clerk be empowered to serve notices and to take such other action as may be necessary to comply with statutory requirements.
iii) That the Chairman and the Clerk be empowered to authorise appropriate action on behalf of the Board in connection with any appeals against the determinations.
B.1194 Rate arrears
Consideration was given to writing off rate arrears amounting to £33.30.
RESOLVED
That the arrears be written off.
B.1195 Health and Safety
Further to minute B.1163, the Chairman referred to the report received from Cope Safety Management following their visit to the District on the 19th November 2019.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
He reported that although a few points had been raised for attention these were all categorised as low risk which the District Officer was attending to. Members discussed the supply of road planings for Green Dyke pumping station and approved for Mr Wilkinson to get a quote and liaise with the District Officer to take any action they considered appropriate concerning the supply and delivery of planings to the pumping station.
B.1196 Completion of the Annual Accounts and Annual Return of the Board – 2018/2019
a) The Board considered the comments of the Auditors on the Annual Return for the year ended on the 31st March 2019.
RESOLVED
i) That, after fully considering the internal controls put in place by their appointed administrators and the checks carried out by their appointed internal auditors, the Board were satisfied that, in all significant respects, the internal control objectives were being achieved throughout the financial year to a standard adequate to meet the needs of the authority.
ii) That the present policies concerning risk management, budget monitoring and insured value of properties are adequate for the size of the business and that they be continued.
iii) That the Clerk and responsible financial officer review the internal audit strategy with the internal auditor to ensure the most appropriate method is in place to ensure the Board continue to comply with the Internal control objectives to a standard adequate to meet the needs of the authority.
b) The Board considered and approved the Audit Report of the Internal Auditor for the year ended on the 31st March 2019.
B.1197 Defra IDB1 Returns
Mr Hill referred to the completed IDB1 form for 2018/2019 and to the letter from the Minister and Annual report summary and analysis received from Defra dated August 2019, which the Board noted and approved.
B.1198 Financial Position
a) The Board considered the Estimate Update for 2019/2020.
Mr Hill reported that although there was additional expenditure at Upwood Common pumping station, it was hoped that this would be covered by standard provisions already included in the figures. The Chairman referred to the potential increase in pumping costs due to the recent rainfall which, if in excess of budget allocations, would be taken from balances.
RESOLVED
That the update be approved.
b) Mr Hill reported that the Board’s cash balance on the 30th November 2019 was:- F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20
Clients Premium Account - £227,589.72
B.1199 Date of next Meeting
Mr Hill reminded Members that the next meeting of the Board will be held on Thursday the 14th May 2020, prior to which the District Inspection will be held.
B.1200 Mrs Johns
Mr Pickard enquired on the current position with regards to Mrs Johns.
The Chairman reported that there continued to be difficulties in collecting rates.
RESOLVED
That a full update be given at the next meeting of the Board.
F:\Admin\BrendaM\Word\rugr\mins\9.1.20